OSA's Digital Library

Applied Optics

Applied Optics


  • Vol. 17, Iss. 4 — Feb. 15, 1978
  • pp: 558–565

Interferometric testing with computer-generated holograms: aberration balancing method and error analysis

Toyohiko Yatagai and Hiroyoshi Saito  »View Author Affiliations

Applied Optics, Vol. 17, Issue 4, pp. 558-565 (1978)

View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (1208 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



When testing aspheric surfaces with a computer-generated hologram, some problems should be considered. In this paper, first, we compare two types of hologram: Lohmann and interference. The phase error in the Lohmann type hologram is estimated, and a method of compensating the error is described. Second, we discuss the relation between the shape of the required wavefront and the number of resolution cells of the hologram. Since testing smaller f number optical elements increases the required number of resolution cells of the hologram, we propose the aberration balancing method to reduce the number of resolution cells. The optimum values of the defocus aberration are calculated. Especially, it is shown that the number of resolution cells in the hologram is capable of being reduced to 25%. Third, we discuss the error due to incorrect hologram size and due to misalignment of the optical system when the aberration balancing method is applied. Finally, an experimental example for testing an aspheric mirror 150 mm in diameter and 300 mm in focal length is given.

© 1978 Optical Society of America

Original Manuscript: February 22, 1977
Published: February 15, 1978

Toyohiko Yatagai and Hiroyoshi Saito, "Interferometric testing with computer-generated holograms: aberration balancing method and error analysis," Appl. Opt. 17, 558-565 (1978)

Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  


  1. A. J. MacGovern, J. C. Wyant, Appl. Opt. 10, 619 (1971). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. K. G. Birch, F. J. Green, J. Phys. D. 5, 1982 (1972). [CrossRef]
  3. A. F. Fercher, M. Kriese, Optik 35, 168 (1972).
  4. T. Yatagai, K. Yasuda, H. Saito, Jpn. J. Opt. 3, 132 (1974).
  5. W. Witz, Optik 42, 287 (1975).
  6. T. Takahasi, K. Konno, M. Kawai, M. Isshiki, Appl. Opt. 15, 546 (1976). [CrossRef]
  7. R. S. Sirohi, H. Blume, K. J. Rosenbruch, Opt. Acta 23, 229 (1976). [CrossRef]
  8. A. F. Fercher, Opt. Acta 23, 347 (1976). [CrossRef]
  9. J. C. Wyant, V. P. Bennett, Appl. Opt. 11, 2833 (1972). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. A. W. Lohmann, D. P. Paris, Appl. Opt. 6, 1739 (1967). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. M. Faulde, A. F. Fercher, R. Torge, R. N. Wilson, Opt. Commun. 7, 363 (1973). [CrossRef]
  12. E. L. O'Neill, Introduction to Statistical Optics (Addison-Wesley, London, 1963), p. 58.
  13. B. R. Brown, A. W. Lohmann, IBM J. Res. Dev. 13, 160 (1969). [CrossRef]
  14. M. Schwartz, Information Transmission, Modulation, and Noise (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970), p. 228.
  15. W. H. Lee, Appl. Opt. 13, 1677 (1974). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. S. D. Conte, Elementary Numerical Analysis (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965), p. 71.
  17. Since the error of measuring interference fringes is considered to be 1/10 of a fringe, it is expected that the reconstructed wavefront error is far less than 1/10 of a fringe in fact.
  18. E. Isaaccson, H. B. Keller, Analysis of Numerical Methods (Wiley, New York, 1966), p. 85.

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited